KjK "insane rant" thread 2

[AdamRyan]

First thread filled up just as it was getting interesting

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5036512-kjks-insane-rant

So let's keep it going. My characterisation if the two basic positions are:

1)KJK is a stone cold legend, haters gonna hate but many women will give her cash to bathe in champagne

2. KJK is taking right wing positions for clicks and cash, most recently criticising a doctors conference to stay relevant.

Happy to discuss further. There are some particular posts I want to respond to which I will c&p below

My gut instinct is that this is about tribalism. You are steeped in a world where everyone is moving into or out of a tribe, and needs to be really careful they aren’t drawn in to an incorrect tribe.

Not at all. My problem has always been the shutting down of debate that certain people don't want to have.

In this instance, it's the shutting down of posters who question KJK and her associations in any way, by saying people who raise it are smearing /misrepresenting/ bad faith etc. But it is a pattern that extends to other aspects of "GC ideology" for want of a better word as well.

If women want to donate to KJK/vote for her party/wear her merch/call her show, no skin off my nose.

It's the attacking people for having a different opinion and calling them liars etc that I really can't stand.

😂
Only on MN. And not a very good one, evidently

This is the sort of thing I mean pickled.
Rather than try to engage with the point, say that I "casually throw doubt on actual, real cases of horrendous child abuse".

I find it pretty gross and unnecessary.

And here is another one.

I wouldn’t call that an attack, though I see why you would.

Serenea raised that case and the clip of KJK which you transcribed.

You said her statements were straight out of QAnon and it was all a massive conspiracy theory.

That was really easy to read as a claim that everything she said was a massive exaggerated conspiracy theory.

That’s easy to be offended by, given that every statement she made was true- or in the case of one statement, was based on what was said in court and widely reported.

KJK rounded up that list of real, appalling abuse with a statement that for so many powerful people to be overlooking that level of abuse, they must think raping children is ok.

Hyperbole or stone cold truth? Close call, frankly. In the past, only too true. Now, one would hope things were better- but it’s hope not certainty.

So frankly, I’m not convinced you get to be offended by KJK’slapdog’s comment.

You are choosing to read the worst of motives to KJK’s words. Other poster are being equally uncharitable towards you.

Can’t feel aggrieved on your behalf on that one, to be honest.

You insult KJK, accuse her of dog whistling the far right, being a conspiracy theorist- and effectively making shit up to stir up racial tensions.

People get sweaty and say similar stuff back at you.

Your words are as open to misinterpretation as KJKs.

Either we’re all open to criticism or we aren’t.

Uou don’t get to be really rude about people, and expect everyone to simper back

If you start a dog fight, people are gonna bite back.

I feel mildly uncomfortable for you because only about 3 posters seem to agree with you, and you demonstrate some persistence which is generally a virtue.

But you’re flogging a dead horse.
KJK isn’t perfect.
KJK has done some great things and made some mistakes (I assume, being human).
KJK isn’t an agreeable person
KJK is a dogged (even more so than you) campaigner who bulldozes through resistance.
She’s loud and bolshy and won’t play nice.

and most of all-
She’s overwhelmingly right. If that ushers in a dark age of repression and racism then I’ll come back and apologise and thank you for your prescience.

we’ll get #AdamWasRight trending.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5048114-kjk-thread-3

I can see we are close to being full and people still have things to say
All welcome on thread 3

That is neither an attempt to attack you nor to shut you down.

I'm just yet to be convinced that her activism is responsible for the imaginary forthcoming fascist takeover.

I CBA to check back but I may have said already that I'm a pluralist, so I'm not beholden to any one person or any one set of ideas.

Enjoy your new thread.

You insult KJK, accuse her of dog whistling the far right, being a conspiracy theorist- and effectively making shit up to stir up racial tensions.

I haven't done any of those things.

I said she says far right things and has far right associations. I believe I've shown both those positions to be reasonable.

Uou don’t get to be really rude about people, and expect everyone to simper back
I would call some of the things people have said about me "really rude".

I would not call pointing out how a public figure comes across to me on a public forum "really rude".

Saying that people "make up shit" when they are posting a reasonable view is rude, designed to shut down the conversation and example of why I have continued the thread.
Why do you want to silence women saying things you don't like?

Yawn.

As I said, enjoy your new thread.

Me too @DrSpartacular Night Night!

I've not read the full thread at this point, just popping in as and when to see if the conversation has shifted from extremely exaggerated hyperbole and misrepresenting what people say/have said/are saying/are clarifying, to taking them at their word. It seems not.

There's STILL talk of anti-Muslim hate going on for one.
Now there's talk of people wanting us "barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen" (God knows where that one's come from!).
And now all of sudden MP's want us stripped of all abortion rights??? Since when do tweaks to abortion laws = stripping us of abortion rights all together?
(Not that I've even come across any meaningful discussion of that among MP's to begin with!)

This entire thread is repeatedly hyperbolic and extreme, and misrepresentative of what posters are actually saying, and when PP's point this out we're then accused of acting like TRA's and told we're giving off "No debate!" vibes when it very much comes across (to me at least) as it being the exact opposite way around!

Fwiw, perhaps the "Silence speaks volumes." is because people have had enough of making articulate and well thought out points only to have it twisted and turned into something else entirely.
I can only speak for myself ofc, but that's largely why I've mostly stopped engaging - The only reason I bothered to come back is because I was so flummoxed at being so badly misunderstood that I was second guessing myself and thinking I must be a horrendously bad communicator!

The only reason I keep popping in occasionally still now is in hopes that a change in direction has happened and PP's are being taken in good faith, but alas it very much still seems to not be the case...
Idek what to say or how to respond to anything posted at this point because it just get's twisted a'la "So what you're saying is...!" from that interview with he who shall not be named for fear or being accused of being/aligning with the "far right" again...

spicy you left claiming I called you far right when I did no such thing. I just refused to agree that Jordan Peterson is a feminist icon. For avoidance of doubt I think JP is right wing, not far right. In common with KJK, I think his youtube videos have been spread and used by less savoury characters to drive their ideology (in JPs case, incels and mras). That's not a very controversial view at all. I can't help it if you don't like the fact JP is popular with incels.

CPAC definitely are anti-abortion and pro-natalist (see here for definition). That has a knock on to women that i don't like. Again, they appeal to the far right. I can't help that.

https://www.jkgeography.com/pro-natalist-and-anti-natalist-policies.html

I really am at a loss as to how saying this is "twisting facts".

So, here is an example. You've screenshot my post which shows exactly what I wrote.

You said her statements were straight out of QAnon and it was all a massive conspiracy theory.

I don't think I said "It was all a massive conspiracy theory".

I said it was consistent with what Q Anon say.

One is a demonstrable fact, one is not.

So i feel you are misrepresenting me. But I'm not jumping down your throat about it. That's how human being communicate.

given that every statement she made was true- or in the case of one statement, was based on what was said in court and widely reported.
That's not actually correct though is it? I don't really want to reopen the whole can of worms but it is debatable how "true" a hyperbolic statement like "vast numbers of men in grooming gangs" can be. Because its subjective.

It was how it was coming across, and tbh I stand by that that's how it's still coming across whether you're saying it outright or not.

You're doing it again, I said nothing of the sort about JP being a "feminist icon".

I said that encouraging men to be faithful, not cheat, and be monogamous was a feminist thing to want to strive for, and disagreed that Incels MRA's are fond of him, as many are not. Not that JP was a "feminist icon".

I also said that the left needs to bare some responsibility for feeding TR more ammunition unnecessarily, you twisted that into me saying that the left is responsible for TR being a racist.

I said that Pakistani/Muslim grooming gangs exist - because grooming gangs that are majority of that ethnicity/religion do in fact exist.
You twisted that into me saying that Muslim's are more likely to be involved in grooming.

I said that people in power DO in fact abuse their positions to take advantage of women and girls, and that was twisted into me agreeing with the global conspiracy of people in power being involved in en mass grooming & pedo rings.

CPAC =/= the UK, it is not our MP's.
I've not even mentioned CPAC as I know very little about it.

I'm really at a loss as to how that's NOT twisting what I and others are saying.

OK so you can comment based on how "I'm coming across" and that's reasonable, but I have to be 100% accurate at all times or I'm "twisting" or "misrepresenting".

Hardly seems fair.

Adam part of the problem is that you have consistently treated posters you disagree with on this thread as if we all share the same position. Maybe you just can't tell us apart, I have no idea, but it does make engaging with you somewhat frustrating.

Hopefully you'll be happier with the level of engagement on your new thread.

Anyway, enjoy your new thread.

You use pedantry as a weapon. I was going to say more but there’s no point as you appear to prefer telling us what we’ve said and what you’ve said, rather than actually working towards understanding.

It feels like DARVO and that’s disappointing and ultimately supremely unproductive. I have tried. I really have.

Thread is full?!?

.